Took this from CNET. Thought of sharing this piece with the readers...

Sony wants to build a flagship superphone. CNET is here with a few steps it needs to take.

Building a smartphone isn't easy. Building one that's a blockbuster success is an even more Herculean task.

The latest company with big smartphone dreams, Sony, is reportedly putting together a flagship device to rival Samsung Electronics'Galaxy S III and Apple's iPhone 5, one that could debut as early as the Consumer Electronics Show in January.But the smartphone business is a brutally competitive one, with only Apple and Samsung generating any success of note. Customers now fawn over the iPhone and Galaxy S phones, but little else. Fortunately, CNET is here and willing to unload a little wisdom onto handset vendors.Without further ado, here are the five "S's" to smartphone success:1. Strategy. As in, have a long-term one ready. Sounds pretty obvious, right? But take a look at the smartphone landscape, and you'll see a lot of companies scrambling to catch up or coming out with a hodgepodge of products with different partners.Companies that want to be successful in this game need to show a little patience. Apple's instant success with the original iPhone was an anomaly, and not something other companies can easily replicate. While the Galaxy S brand is a global force now, it's easy to forget that the phones had a so-so debut on each carrier in the U.S. -- all with their own ridiculous names. Remember the Samsung Galaxy S II Epic 4G Touch? That was a real tongue-twister.But with each new iteration, the Galaxy S branding took hold and consumer awareness and excitement began to build, leading to a phone that can now hold its own against Apple's once untouchable device. Any handset manufacturer looking for an immediate breakout hit though will be disappointed; buzz tends to swell only after a track record of solid products.And even if a handset maker scores an early home run, the resulting spike in demand can catch companies off guard. Just look at what happened to HTC, which was once flying high after its first breakout hits, the Evo 4G and Droid Incredible. Its supply chain was stretched almost to the breaking point and sourcing enough components to to keep up with handset orders became a serious headache.2. Specifications. If you're building a flagship device, don't just cram in all of the trendy features and shiny hardware in that you possibly can. Try to anticipate where customer demand and styles of usage are heading and build devices that satisfy them.For example, HTC's foray into 3D screens and cameras, notably with the Evo 3D, was a terrible idea. Also, don't use components based on competitors in the market now, strive to plan ahead to what will still be a powerful phone a year out. This is a malady that plagues Sony in particular. Its Xperia NXT series (P, U, S), are perfect examples of phones that were obsolete even before they hit store shelves.HTC is now getting with the program, focusing on creating phones with powerful imaging technology and high-performance cameras. Also, HTC President Jason Mackenzie told CNET that for the Droid DNA, his company focused on putting next year's specifications into a phone sold this holiday season.

At minimum, today's smartphone should come equipped with a high-end quad-core processor, 2 gigabytes of RAM, 16 gigabytes of storage (or more), and super high-resolution display packed to the gills with pixels. Other add-ons such as NFC and wireless charging are a plus, although they're slowly becoming standard features themselves.Also, don't underestimate the design aspect of the phone. It sounds like another obvious one, but how many so-called flagship phones look like generic black bricks? Nokia has shown the carriers that color matters, and people like an alternative to drab-looking phones. The HTC Droid DNA, with metallic red accents and premium craftsmanship is another drop-dead gorgeous device.Slim is also still sexy. While phone displays have gotten bigger and bigger, the best smartphone manufacturers are still able to pack all those features into a slimmer phone. Motorola's Razr line has done a good job of keeping the design sleek, and the Razr M in particular has been good at packing in more display into a smaller frame. All high-end smartphones should do away with as much bezel as possible.3. Software. Plenty of handset makers feel they can get away with using an older version ofAndroid. That may be true for mass-market smartphones, but not for your true flagship device. Sony's Xperia TL, its flagship phone for the holidays, finally got Ice Cream Sandwich, or Android 4.0, at a time when many high-end phones ship with Jelly Bean 4.1, or at least have begun to receive updates.

To better stand apart from the pack, the smartphone vendors all like to spread their own "secret sauce" all over Android. HTC has its Sense user interface, while Samsung has Touchwiz. The handset makers need to take a "less is more" approach with this, as any heavy-handed customizations only bog down the phone and often elicit complaints from hardcore Android fans.For example, Samsung's Galaxy S phones started to get improved reviews only after it eased off on the TouchWiz customizations after subsequent iterations. To be fair, carriers share some guilt here. We're convinced they often deliberately withhold software upgrades on existing phones, only to use fresher Android flavors to push users to buy new handsets. Heck, not even the carrier-branded Google Nexus products are immune to this shady shell game.4. Slick marketing. Even if companies build the most spec-ed out phone with the latest software it could still be a flop without the robust marketing support. Just look at HTC, whoseOne X was critically praised but still not successful enough to turn its dampening financial prospects around.The Galaxy S III, meanwhile, has been a monster hit, and that's due in no small part to the massive marketing campaign that Samsung put behind the device. In addition, the ability to maintain the Galaxy S brand throughout its flagship products has been a powerful tool, something that others have emulated with HTC's One, Nokia's Lumia, or Sony's Xperia.It's smart for Sony to keep the Xperia name consistent throughout its product, but the company's brand isn't anywhere near where it used to be, and has fallen on hard times. If Sony wants to be serious about the smartphone business, it needs to pony up and bankroll a much larger marketing campaign or risk disappearing in the noise.And don't count on James Bond to get people to notice your devices either. The Xperia TL may be the most compelling handset Sony has brought to the U.S. market in a long while, but the phone only made a blink-and-you'll-miss-it cameo in the film "Skyfall," and didn't stand out from other average-looking smartphones.How much firepower will you need? Just turn on the television and you'll likely be hit over the head with a Samsung ad for the Galaxy S III or Galaxy Note 2 -- it's easy to see Sammy poured a huge investment in raising awareness for the brand and phone. And while Apple has a huge amount of built-in buzz already, that hasn't stopped the company from heavily promoting its latest iPhone.5. Support from carriers. Ultimately, carrier support can make or break a product. If a carrier decides to position one smartphone as its flagship product, chances are it will do well. Basically, that means the handset manufacturer has to kowtow to their demands while coming up with a standout product in hopes of getting full carrier support, both in the form of marketing support, as well as sales support in its stores. While retailers are slowly becoming a source for smartphone sales, a majority of consumers still shop in the carrier stores.This is where Sony has made a critical error. So far, the company has only worked with AT&T when it comes to its high-end phones, and historically stuck with GSM-based technology. If Sony wants a real chance with consumers, it needs to get to as many people as possible, which means building phones for Verizon Wireless and Sprint. Verizon, in particular, is the largest carrier in the country, and it wouldn't be smart to ignore its base of customers.

Too bad it doesn't have the clout to convince Big Red, or the other carriers, into rubber-stamping approval for its phones.While exclusivity deals have been rendered less important over the years, they are still valuable tools for smartphones looking for some instant attention. The Droid DNA will likely do well as the exclusive flagship for Verizon.At the same time, Samsung and Apple have shown that the best franchises maintain their brands across all carriers. The iPhone is just the iPhone, just like the Galaxy S III is the Galaxy S III everywhere, and not the Captivate, or Obfuscate. Sony has a consistent brand in the Xperia, but right now, it's not one that people care about.Conclusion. OK, maybe these points aren't exactly so secretive. But it's amazing how many companies ignore some or all of these steps. Following through with all five S's is no guarantee of success, but it definitely puts that company on solid footing and a step up from the rest of the industry. For some of these companies, they can use all the help they can get.

This article was posted by Syed Akbar today in his blog. I cant recall how many times he has touched about this issue. I have commented previously until somehow I guess our shouts have fallen on deaf dunggu Minister's ears. Anyway, enjoy reading. It is a good write up.

We are trying to make Bahasa Melayu a language of knowledge. (It has to be Bahasa Melayu because there is no such thing as a Bahasa Brunei or Bahasa Singapura where Bahasa Melayu is also the official language and spoken by the people).

The success or failure of making Bahasa Melayu a language of knowledge does not depend on the number of new technical terms and scientific words which Dewan Bahasa Dan Pustaka has succesfully ciplak from the English language. The success or failure of any language of knowledge depends on whether the people who speak that language (the Malay people) have become knowledgeable and sucessful in the sciences, arts, commerce and trade.

Todate we are not satisfied yet with what has been achieved by the Malays. That is why we are still continuing with the affirmative action policies. That is why Proton is still pulling us down. That is why the former CEO of Proton who used to have 'sembahyang hajat' in the factory now (reportedly) runs a religious school. So we are not there yet.

And at the pace at which the rest of the world is galloping, it looks like the Malays are getting left even further behind. If not for Petronas' oil money pouring into the Treasury, then we would be like Indonesia.

Everything is relative. The time taken to achieve something is also relative. Relative to what? Relative to the time taken by other people to achieve the same objectives. When we take twice, three times or four times the amount of time as other people to achieve the same thing, then what we are doing is WE ARE WASTING A LOT OF TIME, ENERGY, MONEY, RESOURCES AND OPPORTUNITY.

After 27 years Proton is still not going anywhere. We pay the highest car prices in the world to support Proton and other local car producers. Also to keep the AP industry alive. The question is for how many more years or how many more decades are we going to suffer this? Another 5 years, 10 years, 15 years, 25 years?

Similarly, we can still take our time developing Malay into a language of knowledge, science and technology but how many more years is it going to take? It will happen eventually - but how many more years will it take? 20 years, 30 years, 50 years?

Please do not forget that Malay was a language of empire, world trade and it was a powerful language of the sea - the Malays were a global seafaring people - to New Zealand, Madagascar and up to Taiwan. In the Malay language of the Peninsula there are thousands of words that have been borrowed from Tamil, Sanskrit, Arabic and lately Portugese (there are about 1000 Portugese words in Malay including kereta and kerbau). But that was a slow natural process that must have taken centuries to evolve. We dont have the luxury of centuries to do what we have to do.

Dr Kassim Ahmad says it is going to take about 90 years to forge a true Malaysian identity. He says 48 years have gone by. So there are 42 more years to go. We always need more and more time. (I think the Singaporeans have done a better job - in just 40 years).

When we finally develop Malay into a language of knowledge, the rest of the world will already be 50 years ahead of us again. We will forever be playing catching up.

Remember folks, the objective is not just to make Malay a language of knowledge, science and technology. It is more important that we make the Malay people a society of knowledge, science and technology in the quickest possible time.People first. The people should always come first. That is more important.

Isnt there a shorter method? Do we have to waste so much time? Do we have to give Proton another 25 years? Do we have to wait another 25 years for the Malay language to evolve?

To make Bahasa Melayu a language of knowledge the Dewan Bahasa & Pustaka and the otherBahasa Melayu warriors have gone into overdrive to ciplak English words into the Malay language.

Here are some examples just from the letter 'A' alone in the "modern" Malay dictionary or kamus "moden" :

I think you get the idea. This is less than half way through just the letter 'A' from one Malay dictionary. If you look up other Malay dictionaries (Kamus Am, Kamus Oxford, Kamus Dewan Bahasa etc) you will find thousands of other words that are basically ciplak from the English language into Malay.

The Malay language warriors especially those guys at the Dewan Bahasa & Pustaka say that by doing this they are fighting to 'memperkasakan Bahasa Melayu'. Obviously they are talking through their @$$.

Now here is the problem when you ciplak thousands of English words into the Malay language. It will actually slow down the process of understanding and acquiring new knowledge for the Malays.

This is because every word in any language has a meaning that is usually supported by some larger concept behind it, which is peculiar or specific only to that language. In short, each word has a short story behind it unique to that particular language.

Lets take the English word fermentation.

You can say that alchoholic drinks like wine and beer are made through the 'process of fermentation'.

When food goes bad you can also say, 'it has begun to ferment'.

When the Arabs run riot in the Arab Spring you can say, 'it has been fermenting for some time'.

Fermentation is used to describe something (food, drink, people) who are undergoing a change from one state to another state.

Every word has its short history, a larger concept, its nuances in its original language. The same goes for Malay, Chinese, Japanese, German etc.

Now, anyone who speaks in that language will quickly understand the nuances and the short story of each individual word. It does not matter if you are a Punjabi learning Russian, a Malay learning French, an Italian learning Malay or a Chinese learning English - you will soon understand and appreciate how the words are used in that language.

But when you simply take English words and force feed it into the Malay language by adding a 'i' or 'k' or 't' at the end (inovasi, dinamik, audit) it does not mean that you instantly also import the short story or the larger concept behind that English word also into the Malay language. That will not happen immediately. It is sometimes impossible. Even though the new word appears in the Malay dictionary, it is still an alien word to the Malays.

Yes I know, if we can wait a few centuries, then of course these words will eventually be absorbed by the Malay people. Just like Arabic, Tamil, Sanskrit, Portugese have all been absorbed by the Malay people - but that is a process that took centuries. In multi racial, multi cultural MalaysiaTHE MALAYS do not have the luxury of waiting for so long. Sampai bila pun cannot catch up.

Then the other reason why these English ciplak words cannot expedite the absorption of knowledge, commerce, science and technology by the Malays is because thse ciplak English words do not form any part of the everyday conversation between a mother and daughter in the house. Or between a father and son in the house. Or between neighbours in the kampong. Or between Malay people in the surau, in the towns, in the condominiums and the housing areas.

Do you want to know why? Because these are English words kawan. That is why. You cannot go back home to Tembeling or Parit and say anarkis, analogi, analisis. Orang tak faham. These are English words lah ! So when people insist that these ciplak words from the English language will now magically become Malay words and make Bahasa Melayu a language of knowledge - it is not going to happen. You are terribly confused.

And you are denying the Malay people a fast track towards becoming a modern and scientific society. Ok I agree, kalau nak tunggu a few centuries to become a scientific society boleh lah but by that time the human beings may have colonised the planet Mars.

The faster and cheaper option is to use English on a very widespread scale. Especially the learning of science based subjects, mathematics based subjects and management subjects in the English language.

Only then will words like asset, annuity, equity, dynamics, aerodynamics and fermentation be easier to absorb. These words form the everyday usage of the English language. As you use the English language you will automatically understand the wider concepts, the history and the usage of these words which is part and parcel of the language. And MOST IMPORTANTLY you will faster gain the knowledge that is being conveyed.

If there is such a ciplak word as 'fermentasi' in the Malay dictionary, it will only refer to the fermentation of alchohol. But if CNN says, 'the Arabs have been fermenting..' then people here might understand it as 'Arab dah jadi arak'. That would be incorrect. This is why people may end up saying, 'you can come to my State and eat fish burn (ikan bakar)'.

In English there is a car, a pencil, a hill and a bag. In Arabic the car is female, the hill is male. There are different words in Arabic for one car, two cars, many cars. It is more difficult. There are different words for one female gender object, two female gender objects and plural female gender objects. The same repeats for male gender objects. Yet Malay students have no problem learning Arabic in the sekolah agama or the kelas agama.

Habis pasal apa depa tak suka, tak mahu atau tak boleh belajar Inggeris? There is no excuse. If the Malays can learn Arabic, then they can learn any language on the surface of this earth. There is no excuse.

In Singapore and Brunei, the Malays speak perfect English. In Singapore the Malay girls are the English news anchors on their TV. Not only do they just read the news but they also analyse events and superbly interview people in English on TV.

The Malays in Brunei, especially their Civil Servants speak very good English. Of course knowledge of good English, plus being well read in English, makes it easier to have a conversation with them. They seem to know more of the real world. Both in Brunei and Singapore their education system is English based, just like we were until the late 1970s.

Which is why some of our GLCs and some of our banks have started hiring English speaking Singaporean Malays for top jobs here, especially Malay women from Singapore. And consultants as well. I can point names and name fingers too. A Melayu Singapore can now be quite an asset in Kuala Lumpur. They can speak English.

Finally let me repeat again why we must teach Mathematics, Science and other subjects in English in our schools. In Malaysia (as in most developing countries) less than 2% of the population goes on to higher education after high school.

Even if 200,000 students per year enter degree, diploma and certificate courses in all our universities, colleges, institut kemahiran and institut latihan, that is LESS THANONE PERCENT of our 28 million population. And dont forget in this less than 1% it includes Malays, Chinese, Indians, Kadazans and others. Folks, less than 1% of the country's population is NOT going to pull the remaining 99% forward. We need to seriously upgrade the skills and the competitive ability of the 99%.

These are the SPM leavers, the school leavers, the PMR leavers, the sekolah pondok kids and the sekolah agama kids. We have to raise the general ability and knowledge base of our school leavers. These are the 99%.

I have said this before : the makcik who runs that food stall in Cheneh in Terengganu should be able to email or sms or Twitter Fareed Zakaria on CNN with a question on the South China Sea conflict. Why do I say this? Because that is what is happening on Fareed Zakaria in CNN. He answers emails, smses and Twitter messages in English from people who are located all over the world.

They can communicate and have a conversation in English. They need not be the 1% who go to university to do this. They must be the 99% who can speak and use English effectively. We do not understand just exactly how much we are losing.

I commented the below in Syed Akbar Ali's blog regarding Part 1 : What Went Wrong? It was a delicate article yet sensitive which Syed Akbar had earlier mentioned he wud screen and filter the comments. I made it through and because of that as well, Syed Akbar sought after my approval to quote my comments. I was glad to say yes after all I think everyone needs to read this and start realizing it.

Tuan Syed,

Not sure if u will post my comments but I wud like to reiterate some points mentioned in your previous postings.

First of all we need a liberal, moderate to open mindset to accept and agree on differences when one speaks of one's religion in a different perspective.

Problem is when one speaks of one's religion in a different viewpoint and when it comes to a level of disagreement, people tend to run amok and burning down houses, cars and whatnot. This is not tolerance. This is barbaric.

Sorry I hv to say this but it is true. Whether one can accept this is purely down to one's tolerance. I once said this, even Russell Peters said this but when I said it, someone wanted to make a police report.

In India, everyone is of the same skin color but they are fighting with one another because of religion. This is stupid and this is the reason why I mentioned these folks cannot sit down to tolerate one's differences and disagreements.

And difference and disagreements can only be sorted out thru violence and this is what they think.

Remember at 1 point in our lives, the Protestants were fighting with the Catholics but we dont see that now anymore today. Can we ask them how they resolve the issue amicably?

Also I have mentioned before in fact again yesterday, one takes religion too seriously to a point of being fanatic. And whenever something does not go their way, everyone is to be blamed but themselves. If we cant see our own fault, then how are we to improve on our weakness(es) to march forward in a progressive manner?

Then we have dunggus who defend the jihadist for their struggle when they themselves do not know what struggles are. Blindly defending them in the name of jihad and the fact they are being oppressed by Kafirs is just a lame excuse and easy way out.

The fact that these people or community need to wake up and stop living in denial to face reality of the world.

Thank you.

This is an article by Bernard Lewis, an astute observer of the Islamic world. I have highlighted some points in blue. My comments follow at the end of his article.

By all standards of the modern world—economic development, literacy, scientific achievement— Muslim civilization, once a mighty enterprise, has fallen low. Many in the Middle East blame a variety of outside forces.

But underlying much of the Muslim world's travail may be a simple lack of freedom

In the course of the twentieth century it became abundantly clear that things had gone badly wrong in the Middle East — and, indeed, in all the lands of Islam. Compared with Christendom, its rival for more than a millennium, the world of Islam had become poor, weak, and ignorant.

The primacy and therefore the dominance of the West was clear for all to see, invading every aspect of the Muslim's public and even—more painfully—his private life.

Muslim modernizers—by reform or revolution—concentrated their efforts in three main areas: military, economic, and political. The results achieved were, to say the least, disappointing. The quest for victory by updated armies brought a series of humiliating defeats.

The quest for prosperity through development brought in some countries impoverished and corrupt economies in recurring need of external aid, in others an unhealthy dependence on a single resource—oil. And even this was discovered, extracted, and put to use by Western ingenuity and industry, and is doomed, sooner or later, to be exhausted, or, more probably, superseded, as the international community grows weary of a fuel that pollutes the land, the sea, and the air wherever it is used or transported, and that puts the world economy at the mercy of a clique of capricious autocrats.

Worst of all are the political results: the long quest for freedom has left a string of shabby tyrannies, ranging from traditional autocracies to dictatorships that are modern only in their apparatus of repression and indoctrination.

Many remedies were tried—weapons and factories, schools and parliaments—but none achieved the desired result. Here and there they brought some alleviation and, to limited elements of the population, some benefit. But they failed to remedy or even to halt the increasing imbalance between Islam and the Western world.

There was worse to come. It was bad enough for Muslims to feel poor and weak after centuries of being rich and strong, to lose the position of leadership that they had come to regard as their right, and to be reduced to the role of followers of the West. But the twentieth century, particularly the second half, brought further humiliation—the awareness that they were no longer even the first among followers but were falling back in a lengthening line of eager and more successful Westernizers, notably in East Asia.

The rise of Japan had been an encouragement but also a reproach. The later rise of other Asian economic powers brought only reproach. The proud heirs of ancient civilizations had gotten used to hiring Western firms to carry out tasks of which their own contractors and technicians were apparently incapable.

Now Middle Eastern rulers and businessmen found themselves inviting contractors and technicians from Korea—only recently emerged from Japanese colonial rule—to perform these tasks. Following is bad enough; limping in the rear is far worse.

By all the standards that matter in the modern world—economic development and job creation, literacy, educational and scientific achievement, political freedom and respect for human rights—what was once a mighty civilization has indeed fallen low.

"Who did this to us?" is of course a common human response when things are going badly, and many in the Middle East, past and present, have asked this question. They have found several different answers. It is usually easier and always more satisfying to blame others for one's misfortunes.

For a long time the Mongols were the favorite villains. The Mongol invasions of the thirteenth century were blamed for the destruction of both Muslim power and Islamic civilization, and for what was seen as the ensuing weakness and stagnation.

But after a while historians, Muslims and others, pointed to two flaws in this argument. The first was that some of the greatest cultural achievements of Islam, notably in Iran, came after, not before, the Mongol invasions. The second, more difficult to accept but nevertheless undeniable, was that the Mongols overthrew an empire that was already fatally weakened; indeed, it is hard to see how the once mighty empire of the caliphs would otherwise have succumbed to a horde of nomadic horsemen riding across the steppes from East Asia.

The rise of nationalism—itself an import from Europe—produced new perceptions. Arabs could lay the blame for their troubles on the Turks, who had ruled them for many centuries.

Turks could lay the blame for the stagnation of their civilization on the dead weight of the Arab past, in which the creative energies of the Turkish people were caught and immobilized.

Persians could lay the blame for the loss of their ancient glories on Arabs, Turks, and Mongols impartially.

In the nineteenth and twentieth centuries British and French paramountcy in much of the Arab world produced a new and more plausible scapegoat—Western imperialism.

In the Middle East there have been good reasons for such blame. Western political domination, economic penetration, and—longest, deepest, and most insidious of all—cultural influence changed the face of the region and transformed the lives of its people, turning them in new directions, arousing new hopes and fears, creating new dangers and new expectations without precedent in their cultural past.

But the Anglo-French interlude was comparatively brief, and ended half a century ago. Islam's change for the worse began long before and continued unabated afterward.

Inevitably, the role of the British and the French as villains was taken over by the United States, along with other aspects of Western leadership. The attempt to transfer the guilt to America has won considerable support but, for similar reasons, remains unconvincing. Anglo-French rule and American influence, like the Mongol invasions, were a consequence, not a cause, of the inner weakness of Middle Eastern states and societies.

Some observers, both inside and outside the region, have pointed to differences in the post-colonial development of former British possessions—for example, between Aden, in the Middle East, and Singapore or Hong Kong; or between the various lands that once made up the British Empire in India.

Another European contribution to this debate is anti-Semitism, and blaming "the Jews" for all that goes wrong. Jews in traditional Islamic societies experienced the normal constraints and occasional hazards of minority status.

Until the rise and spread of Western tolerance in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, they were better off under Muslim than under Christian rule in most significant respects. With rare exceptions, where hostile stereotypes of the Jew existed in the Islamic tradition, Islamic societies tended to be contemptuous and dismissive rather than suspicious and obsessive.

This made the events of 1948—the failure to prevent the establishment of the state of Israel—all the more of a shock. As some writers observed at the time, it was humiliating enough to be defeated by the great imperial powers of the West; to suffer the same fate at the hands of a contemptible gang of Jews was intolerable. Anti-Semitism and its image of the Jew as a scheming, evil monster provided a soothing antidote.

The earliest specifically anti-Semitic statements in the Middle East occurred among Christian minorities, and can usually be traced back to European originals.

They had limited impact; during the Dreyfus trial in France, for example, when a Jewish officer was unjustly accused and condemned by a hostile court, Muslim comments usually favored the persecuted Jew against his Christian persecutors. But the poison continued to spread, and starting in 1933, Nazi Germany and its various agencies made a concerted and on the whole remarkably successful effort to promote European-style anti-Semitism in the Arab world.

The struggle for Palestine greatly facilitated the acceptance of the anti-Semitic interpretation of history, and led some to attribute all evil in the Middle East—and, indeed, in the world—to secret Jewish plots. This interpretation has pervaded much of the public discourse in the region, including that seen in education, the media, and even entertainment.

An argument sometimes adduced is that the cause of the changed relationship between East and West is not a Middle Eastern decline but a Western upsurge—the discoveries and the scientific, technological, industrial, and political revolutions that transformed the West and vastly increased its wealth and power. But this is merely to restate the question: Why did the discoverers of America sail from Spain rather than from a Muslim Atlantic port, out of which such voyages were indeed attempted in earlier times? Why did the great scientific breakthrough occur in Europe and not, as one might reasonably have expected, in the richer, more advanced, and in most respects more enlightened realm of Islam?

A more sophisticated form of the blame game finds its targets inside, rather than outside, Islamic society. One such target is religion—for some, specifically Islam. But to blame Islam as such is usually hazardous and not often attempted. Nor is it very plausible.

For most of the Middle Ages it was neither the older cultures of the Orient nor the newer cultures of the West that were the major centers of civilization and progress but the world of Islam. There old sciences were recovered and developed and new sciences were created; there new industries were born and manufactures and commerce were expanded to a level without precedent.

There, too, governments and societies achieved a freedom of thought and expression that led persecuted Jews and even dissident Christians to flee Christendom for refuge in Islam. In comparison with modern ideals, and even with modern practice in the more advanced democracies, the medieval Islamic world offered only limited freedom, but that was vastly more than was offered by any of its predecessors, its contemporaries, or most of its successors.

The point has often been made: If Islam is an obstacle to freedom, to science, to economic development, how is it that Muslim society in the past was a pioneer in all three—and this when Muslims were much closer in time to the sources and inspiration of their faith than they are now? Some have posed the question in a different form—not "What has Islam done to the Muslims?" but "What have the Muslims done to Islam?"—and have answered by laying the blame on specific teachers and doctrines and groups.

For those known nowadays as Islamists or fundamentalists, the failures and shortcomings of modern Islamic lands afflict those lands because they adopted alien notions and practices.They fell away from authentic Islam and thus lost their former greatness.

Those known as modernists or reformers take the opposite view, seeing the cause of this loss not in the abandonment but in the retention of old ways, and especially in the inflexibility and ubiquity of the Islamic clergy, who, they say, are responsible for the persistence of beliefs and practices that might have been creative and progressive a thousand years ago but are neither today.

The modernists' usual tactic is not to denounce religion as such, still less Islam in particular, but to level their criticism against fanaticism. It is to fanaticism—and more particularly to fanatical religious authorities—that they attribute the stifling of the once great Islamic scientific movement and, more generally, of the freedom of thought and expression.

A more common approach to this theme has been to discuss a specific problem: the place of religion and of its professional exponents in the political order. In this view a principal cause of Western progress is the separation of Church and State and the creation of a civil society governed by secular laws.

Another approach has been to view the main culprit as the relegation of women to an inferior position in Muslim society, which deprives the Islamic world of the talents and energies of half its people and entrusts the other half's crucial early years of upbringing to illiterate and downtrodden mothers. The products of such an education, it has been said, are likely to grow up either arrogant or submissive, and unfit for a free, open society. However one evaluates the views of secularists and feminists, their success or failure will be a major factor in shaping the Middle Eastern future.

Some solutions that once commanded passionate support have been discarded. The two dominant movements in the twentieth century were socialism and nationalism. Both have been discredited—the first by its failure, the second by its success and consequent exposure as ineffective. Freedom, interpreted to mean national independence, was seen as the great talisman that would bring all other benefits. The overwhelming majority of Muslims now live in independent states, but this has brought no solutions to their problems.

National socialism, the bastard offspring of both ideologies, persists in a few states that have preserved the Nazi-Fascist style of dictatorial government and indoctrination through a vast security apparatus and a single all-powerful party. These regimes have failed every test except survival, and have brought none of the promised benefits. If anything, their infrastructures are even more antiquated than those of other Muslim states, their armed forces designed primarily for terror and repression.

At present two answers to the question of what went wrong command widespread support in the Middle East, each with its own diagnosis and corresponding prescription. One attributes all evil to the abandonment of the divine heritage of Islam and advocates return to a real or imagined past. That is the way of the Iranian revolution and of the so-called fundamentalist movements and regimes in various Muslim countries. The other condemns the past and advocates secular democracy, best embodied in the Turkish Republic, proclaimed in 1923 by Kemal Atatürk.

For the oppressive but ineffectual governments that rule much of the Middle East, finding targets to blame serves a useful, indeed an essential, purpose—to explain the poverty that they have failed to alleviate and to justify the tyranny that they have introduced. They seek to deflect the mounting anger of their unhappy subjects toward other, outside targets.

But growing numbers of Middle Easterners are adopting a more self-critical approach. The question "Who did this to us?" has led only to neurotic fantasies and conspiracy theories. And the question "What did we do wrong?" has led naturally to a second question: "How do we put it right?" In that question, and in the various answers that are being found, lie the best hopes for the future.

During the past few weeks the worldwide exposure given to the views and actions of Osama bin Laden and his hosts the Taliban has provided a new and vivid insight into the eclipse of what was once the greatest, most advanced, and most open civilization in human history.

To a Western observer, schooled in the theory and practice of Western freedom, it is precisely the lack of freedom—freedom of the mind from constraint and indoctrination, to question and inquire and speak; freedom of the economy from corrupt and pervasive mismanagement; freedom of women from male oppression; freedom of citizens from tyranny—that underlies so many of the troubles of the Muslim world. But the road to democracy, as the Western experience amply demonstrates, is long and hard, full of pitfalls and obstacles.

If the peoples of the Middle East continue on their present path, the suicide bomber may become a metaphor for the whole region, and there will be no escape from a downward spiral of hate and spite, rage and self-pity, poverty and oppression, culminating sooner or later in yet another alien domination — perhaps from a new Europe reverting to old ways, perhaps from a resurgent Russia, perhaps from some expanding superpower in the East.

But if they can abandon grievance and victimhood, settle their differences, and join their talents, energies, and resources in a common creative endeavor, they can once again make the Middle East, in modern times as it was in antiquity and in the Middle Ages, a major center of civilization. For the time being, the choice is theirs.

My comments : My view is the Muslims are losing it because they are not following the Quran closely. Neither the jihadi fundamentalists, suicide bombers, Muslim liberals, Muslim modernists or Muslim reformers read the Quran closely to understand what the Quran is telling them.

Instead the Muslms are constantly in dispute over non-Quranic or extra-Quranic teachings which cannot be found in the Quran. The problem for the Muslims is that many of these extra Quranic or non Quranic teachings and beliefs are also very un-Quranic.

Please differentiate between extra-Quranic and un-Quranic. It is very often that the extra Quranic beliefs are also un-Quranic. That is why the Muslims are in such deep sh*t all over the world.

Let me give just one example from Bernard Lewis' article. Lewis says "But underlying much of the Muslim world's travail may be a simple lack of freedom"

I agree with this view 100%. Here is proof. In Malaysia the Muslims have decided that the Government must issue a 'tauliah' before anyone can speak about "religion". Without a 'tauliah' or authorisation no one can speak about "religion". For example even the former Mufti of Perlis Dr MAZA was arrested and charged in the religious court because they said he did not have a "tauliah".

The reality is people like Dr MAZA say things that the mainstream religious people may not agree with. So the 'tauliah' issue is a convenient tool to be used to charge him in Court. But when it comes to the thousands of lebai and ostat who talk all sorts of rubbish, no action is taken against them (when they too do not have tauliah) because the mainstream or the orthodoxy does not feel threatened by the lebai and ostat who peddle their rubbish. So the 'tauliah' can be misused to repress differences of opinions and views.

The biggest nail in the coffin for the religious people are the laws that exist in Malaysia which can fine and/or jail any Muslim who does not follow the mazhab of Ahlul Sunnah Wal Jamaah. If you are a Shia or if you reject the beliefs of the Ahlul Sunnah Wal Jamaah then you can be fined and/or jailed.

There is no proviso for such behaviour in the Quran. The Quran says quite the opposite :

Surah 39:18 "They are the ones who examine all speech (yastamee'una al qawla) then follow the best thereof. These are the ones whom GOD has guided; these are the ones who possess intelligence."

In other words, if you stifle free speech, you become bodoh. If you do not listen to all the different views, then you are among those people who DO NOT POSSESS INTELLIGENCE. Why? Because you will end up listening only to yourself or listening to people who think like you, look like you and even smell like you.

You must allow freedom of speech and then follow what is best from what you hear. That is being intelligent.

In brief, the Quran tells Muslims that in order to be intelligent you must listen to all the different views (yastamee'una al qawla). After listening, then only you follow the best. This is a Quranic teaching.

If you dont allow free speech then it is also an un-Quranic teaching. And this type of un-Quranic teaching will make you less intelligent. You become bodoh.

In almost all Islamic countries, they do not allow intelligent exchange of views about their religion or Islam. Often they prosecute or persecute people for having different religious views. Sunnis persecute Shias, Shias persecute Sunnis and it goes on. In Pakistan the Sunnis persecute the Ahmadiyas and so on. This is a common occurence in Islamic countries. Our country is no exception.

p.s. To those of you who wish to comment please avoid comments like Bernard Lewis is Irish, Jewish, Italian, that he deprived your grandmother of her pisang goreng and crap like that. Lets not waste time. I will delete your comments. Read his article and comment on its merits.

Hakim Joe What is the difference between 5% and 20%? Well, anyone who has half a brain and who had not been asleep during math class in school will tell you that the answer is 15%, as in 20% minus 5%.

Let us convert this to figures and let us hypothesize the figure as ten billion Ringgit. 5% of ten billion is half a billion and 20% is exactly four times that number, i.e., two billion Ringgit. Witness how vast this difference is now.

Imagine a state government possessing the half billion Ringgit to develop the state or to give it to its people. Now imagine the same state government in possession of four times that amount. So, instead of only having the monetary resources to provide aid to a quarter of the state’s population, the state government can now do the same to everybody. Total coverage. Let’s not even get to the full 100% i.e. the ten billion Ringgit.

Now assume that someone powerful within that same state, a tribal leader of sorts, has the influence and capacity to take that state out of the federation. This would mean an income shortfall ranging between 80% and 95% of ten billion Ringgit. Well, money isn’t everything but an action as such could propel other states into mimicking parallel actions and this is unquestionably something that must be prevented at all cost, collateral damage be damned.

On another note, where were you 13,215 days ago?

On June 6, 1976, an Australian manufactured GAF-Nomad N.22B-type twin turboprop engine passenger plane operated by Sabah Air with the tail number 9M-ATZ took off from Labuan Airport (LBU) on its 113-km route to Kota Kinabalu International Airport (BKI) with ten passengers onboard. A routine short flight except for two things. One, almost the entire Sabah state government’s top leadership were on the plane and two, the plane stalled and crashed into the sea approximately 2-km from its destination airport killing the pilot and its ten VIP passengers.

Mechanical problems? Perhaps so but then again the original investigation reports should have been immediately published and the coroner should have declared the “accident” as a misadventure. However, this report was promptly classified by the Federal Government (it still remains classified up to this day) and the coroner, En. Ansari Abdullah, returned an open verdict.

Aviation Safety Network (ASN) reported that the aircraft “stalled and crashed on approach.” However, in its narrative, ASN stated that “This information is not presented as the Flight Safety Foundation or the Aviation Safety Network’s opinion as to the cause of the accident. It is preliminary and is based on the facts as they are known at this time.” What the ASN report did not say was that ground witnesses saw the plane “drop like a stone”. What the experts also failed to inform you is that fixed-wing aircraft do not drop vertically but glide to its impact point unless the wings dropped off and the wings on a fixed wing aircraft do not just drop off by themselves when the engines purportedly stalled.

Non-mechanical problems? There is no way of knowing the truth until the original investigation report is declassified but a few officials have put forth the theory that the aircraft was overloaded.

Overloaded? Let’s just put it this way. The N.22B variant is rated for up to 1 or 2 pilots with a maximum of 12 passengers and unless the pilot and its 10 passengers gorged themselves silly during lunch, there is no way the plane could have exceeded its weight limitations. Problematic aircraft? Yes, the GAF-Nomad N.22B variant aircraft can be considered so. Since its production, the Nomad has been involved in a total of 32 total hull-loss accidents, which have resulted in 76 fatalities including its chief test pilot and the assistant head designer during the design and testing stage.

Conspiracy? One, the fact that Tun Fuad wanted a 20 percent oil royalty for the state, and two, the open secret that Tun Fuad may bring Sabah out of the Federation following Singapore’s footsteps does add spice to the concoction. Three, it is additionally not a secret that Tun Fuad wanted to become the Malaysian Prime Minister some time in his political future.

Three strikes and you are out. Permanently out with a bang.

Did I say “bang”? Well, ground witnesses remembered hearing two distinct explosions. They are the ones who said “bang”… not me.

Additionally, why was Tun Fuad’s aircraft requested to circle the airfield awaiting an imaginary RMAF C-130 Hercules to take off? (Airport logs did not show the existence of any RMAF planes on the tarmac at the time of the accident, let alone a humungous C-130). Shouldn’t the Chief Minister’s flight take preference over everybody, especially in Sabah and especially when it is the Chief Minister’s aircraft with the Chief Minister in it? Were there really two explosions (one in midair and the other when the aircraft crashed) as indicated by witnesses of the crash? How is Lee Kang Yu, a trusted aid and trustee to Harris Salleh who had fled to Hong Kong prior to his death, involved in the crash? Why did a senior communication officer (T.K. Wong) living near the crash site and who was the first to arrive at the crash site tell everybody that the police arrived almost immediately after him and instantaneously condoned off the entire crash site instead of organizing search and rescue teams?

Perhaps an unfortunate (but fatal) coincidence? Nonetheless and regardless of what has actually transpired, the direction of Sabah’s fortunes has been altered forever. From a sovereign state albeit under British rule (after the sushi-eaters have surrendered) to a BN “fixed deposit” does not augur well for its inhabitants. Sabah, with its bountiful natural resources, should have been an extremely rich independent country with limitless opportunities. Why settle for a pittance 5 percent when one can have the entire cake (and eat it too)? Why must the people of Sabah allow Kuala Lumpur to select its Head of State instead of its inhabitants choosing on its own? Why allow foreigners to become citizens of the state without any decision making of its own?

Land Below The Wind? More like “Land Below Putrajaya’s Feet”. But then again, that is solely my opinion and does not reflect any other individual’s view or attitude.

Coming back to the “so-called” conspiracy theory. Who was it that ill convinced Tun Fuad to join the Federation (to form Malaysia) in the first place? This individual is none other than Singapore’s Lee Kuan Yew. At the time when a decision was required, Tun Fuad was opposed to Sabah uniting with Malaya, Sarawak and Singapore to form Malaysia, and in a place where tribal inclinations were strong Tun Fuad could have easily convinced the people of Sabah to reject the Federation. A lot of people might say that Sabah can never stand on its own two feet with the Philippines and Indonesian authorities aggressively laying claims on Sabah but that remains an unproven conjecture that can never be established now.

In what is now known as the Double Six Tragedy, Sabah’s top leadership was wiped off the face of the earth in one fell stroke. Suddenly the deafening silence can be heard everywhere as there is now no questioning the 5% allocated share of the oil royalties and the question of whether Sabah should opt out from the Federation is permanently deferred as Deputy Chief Minister Harris Salleh was sworn in as the sixth Chief Minister of Sabah on the afternoon following the accident. Talk about efficiency.

The fact that Harris Salleh, along with Tengku Razaleigh Hamzah, Datuk Rahman Yaakub (Chief Minister of Sarawak) and a member of the Pahang Royalty were present with Tun Fuad in Labuan for the aborted signing ceremony (the ceremony was deferred to be held in Kota Kinabalu later in the day), is not lost on the people screaming conspiracy. The fact that these three lucky people were suddenly called to inspect some cattle farm there augments the conspiracy theory and the fact that Harris Salleh immediately agreed to the 5% oil royalty, and not the 20% as required by Tun Fuad, spells something sinister in the background. The reality that Tengku Razaleigh Hamzah and Datuk Rahman Yaakub were already strapped into their seats and later urgently requested to disembark from the aircraft by Harris Salleh should be investigated, if not for the break in protocol. One does not insist its superiors to change the official itinerary unless it is of vital importance and visiting some cows in Banggi Kudat cannot be counted as such.

Matter of note: The Oil Agreement was signed between Harris Salleh and Petronas 8 days later on June 14, 1976 and the decision was arrived at without the official consent of the remaining Sabah State Legislative Council. Additionally, with an Open Verdict from the coroner, the Magistrate concerned requested a full reinvestigation into the crash. However no official reinvestigation was ever performed or even initiated but the pertinent issue is why the Magistrate concerned did not follow through on his decision but instead permit the court’s decision to pass.

When Tun Fuad was the Chief Minister of Sabah, a working relationship was agreed upon by the Sabah coalition parties to rotate the post of CM between its partners. After Tun Fuad died in the accident, the rotational system came to a screeching halt. Instead of a one-year tenure for everybody, Harris Salleh governed Sabah from the exact day Tun Fuad died until his eventual retirement on April 22, 1985.

It is not a question of why the rotational system was abruptly terminated but the fact that it was canceled immediately after Tun Fuad’s demise. Yes, rotating the CM seat is not exactly a brilliant idea but one does not change what that has been agreed upon immediately after an accident regardless of whether it is good or bad for the state.

Tun Fuad is no political lightweight. With Sabah as his trump card, he could have easily asked for and obtained the post of the deputy premiership from Tunku (during his first tenure as the CM of Sabah) or from Tun Hussein Onn (during his second term). In 1963, right after Sabah joined the Federation, Tun Fuad had no intentions of being anything other than the first CM of Sabah. However, his friendship with Lee Kuan Yew soon perked his political ambitions and there were rumors that Lee will choose him as the Deputy PM should he become the Malaysian PM after Tunku and Tun Fuad becoming the Malaysian PM after Lee retires. Some even said that this was the basis of how Lee managed to convince Tun Fuad to bring Sabah into the Federation, a secret agreement thrashed out between Tunku, Lee Kuan Yew and Tun Fuad.

History will tell us that this was not to be as Tunku was himself ousted by Tun Razak. Lee was now in limbo and so was Tun Fuad but Sabah was by now already in the Federation. To make matters worse, Singapore was chased out of Malaysia and it was during this time that Tun Fuad’s mentor and best friend Datuk OKK Sedomon Gunsanad, who initially opposed Sabah’s entry into the Federation, died and it was during this same period of time that Tun Fuad harbored intentions of taking Sabah out of Malaysia since “Sabah joined Malaysia because of Singapore and now that the island was out of the Federation, there was no longer any reason for the Borneo state to continue to be in the Federation.”

In this same period of time, there emerged another politician on the fast track and it is none other than Mahathir Mohamad. With the Tunku-Lee-Stephens private accord out of the picture and the discovery of petroleum reserves in East Malaysia, Sabah soon became a cash cow for the nation and any intentions or plans by anyone to make Sabah a self-governed nation must be promptly nipped in the bud.

Tun Fuad has suddenly become a very dangerous adversary and when he became the fifth CM of Sabah for a second term, Kuala Lumpur soon found his position an extreme risk to the very existence of Malaysia, let alone trying to make a few more bucks on it.

Let’s look at Sabah now. In 1970, Sabah was the second richest state. In 2010, it is the poorest state, even with its massive oil reserves, huge palm oil plantations and colossal timber exports. GDP growth is a mere 2.4%, even lower than Kelantan under PAS rule.

When Datuk Yong Teck Lee (SAPP President) made a comment whereby he reiterated that the Double Six Tragedy must be reopened for reinvestigation following Tengku Razaleigh’s revelation that he was seated and strapped into his seat behind Tun Fuad before being invited by Harris Salleh to disembark from the plane to inspect a cattle farm, Datuk Yong was hit by a RM50 million defamation lawsuit from the 81-year old Harris Salleh. When the courts ruled in favor of Harris, this sent a very loud message to everybody in Malaysia that the Double Six Tragedy is off limits.

Question: Why classify the findings of an air crash and why persecute those who wish to know the truth? Why was the official signing ceremony aborted in Labuan (to be held a few hours later in KK) when everybody concerned was already present? What actually transpired in the meeting in Labuan?

So many questions but no answers forthcoming. Sabahans, cast your votes wisely.

Last week, Barron's ran a cover story entitled "Bye-Bye, PCs" that pointed out some rather troubling facts facing once-mighty Microsoft...For example, this year worldwide PC sales are expected to drop 2% -- while tablet sales are projected to surge 65% and smartphone are on track to top PC sales for the first time ever.To make matters worse, industry research firm Gartner says that, "Windows 8 will be something that most organizations do not deploy broadly" -- and a recent survey byInformationWeek shows that 47% of IT professionals have no plans to upgrade to Microsoft's just-released and much-hyped operating system.Of course, this may come as no surprise. After all, the shift away from PCs -- and Microsoft products in general -- has been happening for some time now.But here's something that is rather surprising...According to the smartest investor I've ever met, the biggest problem facing Microsoft isn't Windows 8... iPads... iPhones... or even social media sites like Facebook.Instead, it's the 119-year-old secret lurking inside two massive windowless warehouses that were built on the banks of the Columbia River in 2005.Those who know this incredible story have already been able to secure gains of 565% in a little over two years, but if everything plays out like this investor says it will, this may just be the beginning. Which is why he says the time to act isright now.

I was contemplating writing this article. I didn’t have the mojo to do so. Quite often mojo plays an important part in making me write. There are so many things I want to write about you know. Things such as Chua Soi Lek’s stupidity, Malaysia’s proposal to remove death penalty for drug traffickers, Putrajaya Parks in fuck up condition, Apple’s idiocracy on iPad mini, my proposal for several wives in mind and the list goes on.So the contemplation somehow outdid me and here I am writing about what I have in mind. Recently there have been enquiries from close friends (not wanting to say who they are or how close they are), enquiring after purchasing property in Penang. The way they talk and the way they walk (well I didn’t see them walk btw, just for the sake saying tho) makes you actually want to laugh. But the laughter creates anger on the other hand. The laughter cums anger makes you laugh so much harder that you wish you’d kill yourself there and then. Because while laughing in anger and trying to kill yourself, you actually see the stupidity in these people who actually know nothing but talk! OK, let me be not so mean. I don’t want my readers to jump into conclusion before they complete reading the entire article. These friends of mine (directly or indirectly) are hoping and seeking for a property in Penang for the very sincere purpose of living in it. They are NOT rich farkers like some who buy and keep just to see the house rot. These friends are really in need of a property to live in – where you may call it home someday. What makes me wonder in today’s world and generation of fuckheads is really beyond me. Beyond me as I cant totally understand what the fuck is really playing in their minds. Because from my own perspective, this to me is just simple logic and common sense. It aint rocket science. If you are interested in buying something, you need to know what you want (or need) in the first place. Do some research in knowing what you wish, want or need and when I say research, it simply means the price, the location, preference and what not. You cant be barging into a Merc showroom and tell the salesperson, I want the cheapest Bentley car that runs on lowest mileage. Surely, there will be none of it even if you had the cash!! Similarly you cant just run into a boutique and tell the person I want a classy fur coat but only to chicken out when you see the price. This is not how it works. Well, apparently this is the approach my so-called friends took. They wanted to buy a property within a certain budget/price but there was no such price in the market for sale. So how the hell do u push thru and insists that you want a property of such kind to meet your demands? This is absurd. Then this fellar (or friend) had the cheek to say that the property value increased by 40k in less than 2 weeks. Huh!?!?!? WTF? Can someone please enlighten me which property can rise by 40k in two weeks given the nature of the market force? Don’t be so dunggu la!! First of all, you had under-budget-ed the property you wish to buy. Then where there is no such property with such budget, you deduce that the property had gone up by XX amount within the so-called period. The best part was, this person (as I said earlier) exclaimed that the agent managed to find a few units within the desired budget. Ok la, if got then why didn’t buy?? Chiew!! I don’t know how some people think. With the difference of 40k, taking a loan into consideration with a loan tenure of 20 years, seriously how much does that cost you a month in installment? Fikir la sikit (Stop to think a bit la). A meager RM167 a mth not including interest calculation. Interest here is a constant hence it make no difference for calculation sake. And furthermore, want to buy a property yet wanna complain about not having any financial freedom. Hello, every commitment comes with a sacrifice ok?? Then another so-called friend of mine was asking around for a condo with a budget of below 700k with stated preferences. After looking around, this friend opted not to pursue further. Sigh! I just don’t know what to say. The reason for opting out was because they believe that once the property bubble burst, the property value would go down. Let me ask you guys the ‘soalan cepu emas’ or the GOLDEN QUESTION. In Penang, especially strategic areas/location, how much do you think the property value would go down given the assumption that the property bubble did indeed burst? 10%? 20%? 35%? Or 50%? Seriously, pakai otak la sikit (use a bit of your brain). Given the current property value of today, let’s say 800k, if the bubble had burst one day, I reckon the value would not go down any more than 15%. It is simple Math. 15% would mean RM120k. So a property now would literally be valued at RM680k. Though I reckoned this, but I truly believe this is too farfetched. Having said so, 10% decline would sound more reasonable. But, let’s say it goes down by 15% la, then the 2nd question would be – ARE YOU THEN PREPARED TO BUY THE PROPERTY AT RM680K??? I bet my last penny, given the dynamics of human nature, one would still wait and hope the price further went down. My advice – please do so by continuing to wait!! I will talk about this more in my next article. No wonder the Genneva gold scam just took off so well. It is because of such people who don’t stop to think twice.

Posted By Dr.HSU The most important asset of a country is not its natural resources, but rather human resources. This is especially true in a knowledge based economy, which of course will be the trend in future if not already the trend in most of the western countries. My daughter, who is in her final year medicine in Auckland, told me that a team of Singapore recruitment officers have just visited Auckland and talked to the Malaysian students there, offering job and training prospect for the final year students once they graduate. My daughter also told me that over the last few years, quite a lot of her Malaysian seniors, after graduating from medical courses in NZ, have gone to Singapore to work as house-officers and subsequently stayed back in Singapore for their postgraduate training. Similar teams are sent to Australia and UK for recruiting Malaysians there to work in Singapore. About a year ago, in one of the articles in Reuters, this was reported: Malaysia is counting on bright, ambitious people like Tan Chye Ling for its future, to lead it away from manufacturing and into the knowledge age. But the 32-year-old scientist, a post-graduate in molecular biology, is not counting on Malaysia to look after her future. "I felt very suppressed in Malaysia ," said Tan, who moved to neighbouring Singapore , the region's pace-setter for biotech investment, after a decade of study and research in Malaysia . "I have benefited from the better research environment and salary scheme here. Things are much smoother," she said by phone from the National University of Singapore where she is studying dust mites and allergies. Tan estimates that 60 percent of the research teams she works with in Singapore are from Malaysia, despite her country's efforts over several years to develop a biotech industry. The Malaysian government unveiled plans last March to spend $553.3 million over five years to boost research, attract foreign investment and build new facilities. But its efforts are wasted unless it can retain more talented people like Tan. "By the time we have the research environment in place, every other country would have taken a slice of the biotech investment pie," said Iskandar Mizal, head of the state-run Malaysian Biotech Corporation which oversees the government's strategy. There is a serious problem facing Malaysia and that is the problem of Brain Drain. Why are Malaysians overseas not coming back to work? Well, pay may be part of the reasons but is not the main reason. Singapore recruitment team offered Malaysian students there a salary which is a few times they would expect to get in Malaysia….S$40,000 a yr for houseman after tax (equivalent to RM86000) which is about 5 times the pay of a houseman in Malaysia. But, as I say, pay is not the main problem. The living expenses Overseas is high. And for a person working overseas, the loneliness and the stress level is also high. So not everyone opts to work overseas because of pay. Many would not mind to work for lesser pay if they can stay near to their loved ones. Why do people choose to work overseas, away from their loved ones? Malaysia has many state-of-the-art hospitals and research centres, which may even be the envy of many overseas countries. But hardware alone would not attract these experts o come home. In the medical fields, I have so many friends /classmates working overseas, many in world renowned centres. Why do they do that? Some of my classmates and friends did come back as specialists. After working a few years (many lasted a few months), most get disillusioned and went off. There is really not much prospect of career advancement. How many can hope to become a professor, even when they are an acknowledged expert in their field? On the other hand, lesser beings are being promoted to professorship for doing much less. How many of them can have any say about how things are to be run? How many of them can blend into the local team where the work attitude is vastly different from that overseas? There is an unwritten rule that even if the person is very good, the head of the team has to be someone from a certain ethnic group who may not even be half as good as him. In everyday life, some become disillusioned with the corruption, the red tape and tidak apa attitude of the officialdom. For an overseas doctor applying to work home, the application can take up to 6 months to get approved, whereas, Singapore sends teams overseas to recruit them on the spot, giving them forms to fill and offering them jobs immediately as long as they pass their final examination. See the difference? It is the sense of being wanted and being appreciated that make these people stay overseas. Back here, they are often made to feel that they are of a lower class; they do not feel wanted and they do not feel appreciated…. That is the main reason. For those with children, the education system puts them off. Even school children can feel being discriminated; one glaring example is the 2 systems in PreUniversity education. All these make them pack their bags and off they go again, leaving behind their parents perhaps, siblings, friends they grew up together, favourite food that is often not available overseas. No one likes to be like this; circumstances and a sense of being recognized for their worth make them go away…It is really sad.Parents spend huge amount of money educating them, but the ones who benefit are the Singaporeans, the Americans, the Australian, the British and so on. As long as race politics is not done away with, this problem of brain drain will continue and Malaysia will always lack behind the advanced countries, no matter how many twin towers and Putrajayas we build.

ENJOY!!! This book “The March to Putrajaya – Malaysia’s New Era is at Hand” was recently banned by the Malaysian Home Minister, but is now available at the Internet. Readers can download the contents of the book HERE. Stupid Gomen!! They ban this book thus arousing the curiousity of the rakyat....more will want to read them now!! If you want change of government please do your part by forwarding to as many MALAYSIANS as possible regardless of whether they are Indians, Malays or Chinese. If we do nothing it as is akin to an endorsement of what they doing...... corrupting, bastardising the various civil institutions and playing up race and religious issues.

Fallen from Grace. What can I say more? She came out a few days ago so gung-ho with her pussy guns blazing and you could even feel the heat and pride oozing from the whacked pussy. Well, now she has been given an ultimatum. Either marry the Xmas-tree-shaped dick k-pop superstar wannabe or leave the house in a month. I think her mother is doing what is right for a mum. She is putting her foot down and I totally support her. Readers should goto Stomper to see how the netizens feel about this saga. The best part though is, the Xmas-tree-shaped dick k-pop superstar wannabe plans to support her financially. Support her financially how when he doesn’t even have a job? If you say support her nympho needs I bet that would not be an issue la. Both are so immature when it comes to talking. All talk and no action makes Al-Viv a dull and loose couple!!! (Check it out in GutterUncensored on what whack-pussy had to say to Gutter… Poor thing!!!) Excerpts from Gutter, ‘…. Two days before they made this new video Vivian seemed quite mad at the Gutter Uncensored blog for sharing without their permission the naked photos and erotic videos that they made for a sex blog with a small following. Here is the first message Vivian sent to the Gutter Uncensored on the Facebook fan page on October 15 after we posted the pics and vids and she wasn't happy about it:

Vivian Lee

Delete that (facebook) post now!!!!

and please delete the blog post too. Thank you!!!

it's very rude to post things about people without their permission.

(Wahhh….. Scared what free publicity what!!! Why so chickened out?? Permission? Fuck you la!!) Things are still hot and rosy, so all the talk. 6 months down the road, AL-Dicko will have a new found Pussy and old whacked-puss-IV will have no choice but live on the streets with nowhere to go. Who wants to bet?? On the other hand, this so-called intellect is now planning to move on to the big screens. I guess you need not be that ambitious yet. Start from basic – you know somewhat like 3-star porno then move up the ranks to those big time porn. I have complete faith you guys will get there. While en route to achieving that, I would like to see how the relationship works out 1 year down the road. Let’s see whacked -pussy Viv still works on the Work of Art with her Xmas-tree-shaped dick boyfriend of hers then. You have brought utter shame, disgrace and stupidity onto yourself and you have no one to blame but yourself.